[NCAP-Discuss] NCAP Task 4&7 :: Efficacy Study of Controlled Interruption Framework

Thomas, Matthew mthomas at verisign.com
Fri May 3 22:21:44 UTC 2019


NCAP Chairs,

One thing mentioned during the last NCAP call was to flush out Task 4 and subsequently dependent items like Task 7. I would like to bring up a topic that I propose be expressly considered by the NCAP working party. I feel it would be prudent for us to ask that ICANN should, at a minimum, release the studies they have done on the name collision mitigation frameworks (i.e. Controlled Interruption) so that the community can judge if the same framework should be applied. If this is not possible, we should urge ICANN to include a prompt and formal study that quantifies the efficacy of the previous controlled interruption framework and this should be conducted as part of one/multiple portions of the NCAP Study sections and prior to modifying, adapting, or reusing the same name collision framework for future delegations.  The JAS work for ICANN was effectively unilateral, there was no peer review, and even most SSAC comments were not incorporated at the time.  Without a proper efficacy study or review of operational data from known delegation collisions (such as .dev, .app, etc.) , I am afraid that we are putting the cart before the horse again.

Matt Thomas

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20190503/c31d6178/attachment.html>


More information about the NCAP-Discuss mailing list